[SteveM324]

Yes it doesn't sound quite as dramatic as that graph suggests and of course human hearing doesn't come in till about 20 Hz.
It's was just "less" and I do love my bass. It's one of my favourite features of the Elite.

I agree. I love the bass and the rich full body sound provided by the hybrid pads. It’s the sound of the Elites with the hybrid pads that makes it a desireable listen for me.

 

[Roybenz]

It's an upgrade imo, but I won't wax lyrical because I have an almost new one for sale since my Elites are also going. Let me know if you're interested

Is it 4 pin xlr?

 

[TheAttorney]

As I wrote in my review, differences are subtle in the frequency response domain but still enough to distinguish each pad and the main difference in the sound character comes from other sound aspects.

I first read your review before getting the Angled pads. I've just read it again after living with the Angled for a while - and I very much agree with the way you've differentiated the sound characteristics of the three pad types - including the "other sound aspects".

There's no right or wrong answer as to personal preference, but I'm struck how some people attach so much importance to FR, whilst hardly ever mentioning other aspects, such as transparency, sound stage depth and the placement of images within the sound stage. I'm more tolerant of FR differences (as long as they are not too extreme), but I'm less tolerant of losing transparency that appears to be the inevitable side effect of any EQ (at least any EQ that I've tried so far).

With such different perspectives, it's probably not surprising that we are getting different reactions to these pads, so it's great to have a choice.

My last couple of points on these pads:

1. The Angled pads have an extra dust mesh, the other two pads don't. This I think is worth highlighting more than it has been so far, because that extra mesh will help stop dust getting into the drivers. The metal grill alone is too open to be a very effective dust barrier IMO.

2. The Hybrid pads still look the sleekest, if sleek looks are important to you. Both the Alcantaras are quite a bit chunkier. With a any of the three pads, the Elite's look a lot bigger on your head than they do in your hands.

 

[Klmahnn]

I first read your review before getting the Angled pads. I've just read it again after living with the Angled for a while - and I very much agree with the way you've differentiated the sound characteristics of the three pad types - including the "other sound aspects".

There's no right or wrong answer as to personal preference, but I'm struck how some people attach so much importance to FR, whilst hardly ever mentioning other aspects, such as transparency, sound stage depth and the placement of images within the sound stage. I'm more tolerant of FR differences (as long as they are not too extreme), but I'm less tolerant of losing transparency that appears to be the inevitable side effect of any EQ (at least any EQ that I've tried so far).

With such different perspectives, it's probably not surprising that we are getting different reactions to these pads, so it's great to have a choice.

My last couple of points on these pads:

1. The Angled pads have an extra dust mesh, the other two pads don't. This I think is worth highlighting more than it has been so far, because that extra mesh will help stop dust getting into the drivers. The metal grill alone is too open to be a very effective dust barrier IMO.

2. The Hybrid pads still look the sleekest, if sleek looks are important to you. Both the Alcantaras are quite a bit chunkier. With a any of the three pads, the Elite's look a lot bigger on your head than they do in your hands.

"The Angled pads have an extra dust mesh" Very interesting, thanks!

 

[Ichos]

I first read your review before getting the Angled pads. I've just read it again after living with the Angled for a while - and I very much agree with the way you've differentiated the sound characteristics of the three pad types - including the "other sound aspects".

There's no right or wrong answer as to personal preference, but I'm struck how some people attach so much importance to FR, whilst hardly ever mentioning other aspects, such as transparency, sound stage depth and the placement of images within the sound stage. I'm more tolerant of FR differences (as long as they are not too extreme), but I'm less tolerant of losing transparency that appears to be the inevitable side effect of any EQ (at least any EQ that I've tried so far).

With such different perspectives, it's probably not surprising that we are getting different reactions to these pads, so it's great to have a choice.

My last couple of points on these pads:

1. The Angled pads have an extra dust mesh, the other two pads don't. This I think is worth highlighting more than it has been so far, because that extra mesh will help stop dust getting into the drivers. The metal grill alone is too open to be a very effective dust barrier IMO.

2. The Hybrid pads still look the sleekest, if sleek looks are important to you. Both the Alcantaras are quite a bit chunkier. With a any of the three pads, the Elite's look a lot bigger on your head than they do in your hands.

My greatest joy and award are comments like yours, I am very happy to find out that another person is in agreement with the review narrative.

BTW, thank you very much for highlighting the importance of the mesh.
I am going to add it in the review.

 

[adrianm]

Is it 4 pin xlr?

Yep. Aeco gold plated.

 

[adrianm]

In general I'm not a fan of electrostatic headphone, however, X9000 is indeed sound sublime. It's still crazy revealing, just like any other high end electrostatic cans, but when the recording is good, X9000 perform really well in term of being natural, smooth and "sharp" imaging quality. Comfort wise, also great. Not Elite level yet, but close.



I won't bluntly recommend people to go Stealth/Expanse direction coming from Meze Elite. They sound too different. Stealth/Expanse is a comfortable headphone indeed. Still, not Elite level, but close.

I take it you've heard the Stealth and X9000? Curious how you'd compare them and on what setups.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

There's no right or wrong answer as to personal preference, but I'm struck how some people attach so much importance to FR, whilst hardly ever mentioning other aspects, such as transparency, sound stage depth and the placement of images within the sound stage. I'm more tolerant of FR differences (as long as they are not too extreme), but I'm less tolerant of losing transparency that appears to be the inevitable side effect of any EQ (at least any EQ that I've tried so far).

In this open forum, I will express my opinion that (tl;dr) EQ does not at all necessarily reduce or remove the "transparency" of a headphone's sound (here, I am assuming that "transparency" is the opposite of "veiling", or the feeling of the original live music being that much closer to you). Depending on how you are doing the EQ, or the quality of your EQ app's or hardware's implementation, I've personally found that one can yield excellent results that substantially improve clarity (particularly in tracks rich with frequencies all across the band such as symphonic works or "Parade" (particularly 4:33 and on) which I had linked in my original post (#4,541)) and vividness ("transparency") to me, correcting frequency responses toward a tonal balance that sounds the most "real" to me. Maybe I am an outlier, but so far, no stock tuning of any headphone I have heard has been able to be completely preferable to what I can hear out of a well-done and refined-by-ear Harman or diffuse-field EQ at least for sounding the "most transparent" without the stock tuning "artificially" adding warmth or other characteristics to the recording. Regardless, as in my original post (#4,541), it is possible to EQ multiple headphones close to the same FR target and still find things that you prefer about one or another, mind it is possible to prefer a headphone EQed toward a target over one engineered to already adhere closely to it.

I particularly use Equalizer APO's variable-band graphic equalizer to correct tonal balance and hissy peaks. At least with this implementation of EQ, I am not at all hearing a "loss of transparency", but rather the complete opposite, like a lifting of a veil be it from the lowering of muffling bass, or the raising of muffled upper mids and lower treble (ear gain). And if this EQ's implementation is minimum-phase or whatever, I am not at all hearing any side effects from EQ that cause the sound to be "ruined" as some seem to find. If using fixed-band EQ or being constrained to combining filters in parametric EQ, then yes, EQing one frequency may lead to other problematic or desirable adjacent frequencies being raised or lowered with it, but with variable-band EQ where you can specify granular graphic compensations at any frequency (like parametric EQ, but you can do connect-the-dots shaping of the compensation), when EQing by ear with a constant-amplitude sine sweep like in , it is easy to detect and correct deviations from a smooth frequency response or smoothen out even the smallest peaks or dips. In this exploration, you might for example find that within these headphones or pads that you like, there was a hiss at a certain frequency that when toned down makes your music sound smoother. Or you might EQ down and smoothen some midbass or lower-mids and be welcomed by an increase in clarity while still being able to hear and enjoy any warmth or fullness present in the recording. Or as I have lately found, EQing a downward slope from 4 kHz to 7 kHz prior to the ear-related 8 kHz peak and dip cleans up sounds that were previously excessively amplified, also yielding an increased feeling of space and empty air now that those frequencies are no longer so forward (I have perceived the same benefit from both my Meze Elite and Arya Stealth). And yes, depending on your preference or if your own ears' gain region or sensitivity happens to be higher or lower, you can tune this until it sounds just right, all the while having something most likely substantially cleaner than anything currently achievable with a stock tuning.

Anyways, EQ so far has been my means of getting the absolute best out of my new Meze Elite Tungsten which I will be covering shortly, and as you will see, the Elite with all its engineering proves to be a quite excellent platform for achieving such a clean EQed frequency response.

 

[haha161]

The Angled pads have an extra dust mesh

has anyone try to clean dust inside the driver?

do dust build up very much inside the driver?

 

[oniel459]

has anyone try to clean dust inside the driver?

do dust build up very much inside the driver?

None for me, over a year and a half and majority of it on a room stand

 

[TheAttorney]

has anyone try to clean dust inside the driver?

do dust build up very much inside the driver?

A significant consideration is the dust and flakes coming off your skin and hair, which is considerable even if you don't think you have dandruff - it's a normal process for skin.

I don't know about the Elites (I haven't had them long enough), but with other headphones in the past, I could see dust on the drivers after a few months despite there being a protection cloth with seemingly a fine mesh.

I don't know if this matters in practice to end SQ, but it makes sense to avoid dust where possible.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm talking about dust risk when actually wearing the headphones. The typically much finer dust accumulation when the headphones are not in use is a different type of risk that requires it's own precautions.

 

[TheMiddleSky]

I take it you've heard the Stealth and X9000? Curious how you'd compare them and on what setups.

Not side by side, and surely through different set up. In term of sound I would take X9000 anytime any day over stealth.

 

[Roybenz]

Considering order the Lavricable Grand. It’s available in 4 core and 8 core. What’s the difference in sound on those ?

Elite is pretty easy to drive. Would they even benefit from 8 core vs 4 core?

Is there any other cable that’s better for same price? It’s 850€ 8 cores and 550 for 4 cores.

 

[Ichos]

Considering order the Lavricable Grand. It’s available in 4 core and 8 core. What’s the difference in sound on those ?

Elite is pretty easy to drive. Would they even benefit from 8 core vs 4 core?

Is there any other cable that’s better for same price? It’s 850€ 8 cores and 550 for 4 cores.

It got nothing to do with driving efficiency.
8 core cable will have lower resistance and theoretically will carry the signal with less losses.
The Grand is my main cable for the Elite and it's greater sound characteristic is that it doesn't have a sound of it's own.
This cable is about absolute transparency, it is like it doesn't exist and you have your headphone miraculously connected to the source without a cable!

 

[Roybenz]

It got nothing to do with driving efficiency.
8 core cable will have lower resistance and theoretically will carry the signal with less losses.
The Grand is my main cable for the Elite and it's greater sound characteristic is that it doesn't have a sound of it's own.
This cable is about absolute transparency, it is like it doesn't exist and you have your headphone miraculously connected to the source without a cable!

So it wont make much of a difference if I go 4 or 8 cores ?